Faculty Bibliography

OBJECTIVE:Splanchnic artery aneurysms (SAAs) are rare, and little is known about their natural history and management. We reviewed our single-center experience in managing this population of patients. METHODS:A retrospective review of the Yale radiologic database from January 1999 to December 2016 was performed. Only patients with an SAA and a computed tomography scan of the abdomen were selected for review. Demographics of the patients, aneurysm characteristics, management, postoperative complications, and follow-up data were collected. Our primary outcomes included aneurysm growth rate and risk of rupture in those patients managed nonoperatively and morbidity and mortality of those SAA patients who underwent operative intervention. RESULTS:There were 122 patients with 138 SAAs identified; 77 were male (62%), with a mean age of 66 years (range, 25-94 years). On computed tomography, 56 (45%) had previously diagnosed or concomitant aneurysms elsewhere. Of the patients managed nonoperatively, 101 patients (79%) had 108 SAAs; in the operative intervention group, 25 (21%) patients had 30 SAAs. The mean overall vessel diameter was 1.76 ± 0.83 cm. The diameter of observed and operatively repaired SAAs was 1.58 ± 0.56 cm and 2.41 ± 1.23 cm, respectively (P = .00001). Mean follow-up was 50 ± 42 months for nonoperative management without any adverse events related to SAA, including 10 patients with SAA >2.0 cm. The mean observed growth rate for SAA was 0.064 ± 0.18 cm/y. All symptomatic patients who presented with severe abdominal pain (n = 11 [44%]) underwent operative intervention. Five patients presented with a ruptured SAA (3.6%; range, 2.3-5.0 cm); all of them except one underwent operative intervention. Other indications for repair included large size in seven, rapid growth in two, other open abdominal surgical procedures in two, multiple aneurysms in one, and desire to pursue fertility treatment in one. Operative repair included 14 (56%) endovascular embolizations and 11 (44%) open abdominal operations. After endovascular embolization, two patients underwent abdominal operation for hemorrhage and splenectomy. Open repairs included bypasses in six, splenectomy in two, resection in two, and plication in one. Two patients had postoperative acute kidney injury that resolved and one died of multisystem organ failure. One bypass occluded without sequelae. On multivariable regression analysis, female sex (P = .02) was associated with faster growth rate, and a history of smoking (P = .04) was associated with slower growth rate. CONCLUSIONS:It seems reasonable to observe asymptomatic patients with an SAA <2.0 cm because of the slow growth rate (0.064 ± 0.18 cm/y) and benign behavior. When intervention is needed, both open and endovascular options should be considered.

OBJECTIVE:Although renal artery aneurysms (RAAs) are uncommon, several large reports have been published indicating their benign natural history. The objective of our study was to review our single-center experience managing this disease entity. METHODS:A retrospective review of the Yale radiologic database from January 1999 to December 2016 was performed. Only patients with RAA and a computed tomography scan of the abdomen were selected for review. Demographics of the patients, aneurysm characteristics, management, postoperative complications, and follow-up data were collected. RESULTS:There were 241 patients with 259 RAAs identified, with a mean age of 69 years (range, 35-100 years); 147 were female (61%). On computed tomography, aneurysms were solitary and right sided in 224 (86%) and 159 (61%), respectively; 64 (27%) patients had aneurysms elsewhere. The breakdown of RAAs by location was as follows: renal bifurcation in 84 (32%), renal pelvis in 77 (30%), distal renal artery in 58 (22%), mid renal artery in 34 (13%), and proximal renal artery in 6 (2%). Five patients had symptoms that were attributed to the RAA and underwent operative repair; all others were observed without an operation. Symptoms in the operative repair group included flank pain in four and uncontrolled hypertension in one. The mean overall diameter of the RAAs was 1.22 ± 0.49 cm. The diameter of operatively repaired and observed RAAs was 1.84 ± 0.55 cm and 1.21 ± 0.48 cm, respectively (P = .002). Operative repair included four coil embolizations and one open resection. There were no renal function changes in any of these patients after operation and no other complications. Mean follow-up was 41 ± 35 months for patients in the group that was observed; 18 of these RAAs were >2 cm, and none ruptured. On multivariable regression analysis, female sex (P = .0001), smoking history (P = .00007), left-sided RAA (P = .03), and main renal artery location (P = .03) were inversely related to growth, whereas a history of hypertension was directly related to growth rate (P = .01). The mean growth rate for RAAs was 0.017 ± 0.052 cm/y. CONCLUSIONS:RAAs tend to have a benign natural history. Although previous reports have not identified any factors that contribute to RAA growth, we observed that RAA location, sex, smoking history, and hypertension may have an impact on growth rates. No ruptures were observed. Operative repair at our institution was rare, with no morbidity or mortality. Observation of RAAs over time seems feasible in the asymptomatic patient with a small RAA.

OBJECTIVE:The objective of this study was to examine whether prophylactic use of EndoAnchors (Medtronic, Santa Rosa, Calif) contributes to improved outcomes after endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) of abdominal aortic aneurysms through 2 years. METHODS:The Aneurysm Treatment Using the Heli-FX Aortic Securement System Global Registry (ANCHOR) subjects who received prophylactic EndoAnchors during EVAR were considered for this analysis. Imaging data of retrospective subjects who underwent EVAR at ANCHOR enrolling institutions were obtained to create a control sample. Nineteen baseline anatomic measurements were used to perform propensity score matching, yielding 99 matched pairs. Follow-up imaging of the ANCHOR and control cohorts was then compared to examine outcomes through 2 years, using Kaplan-Meier survival analysis. RESULTS:Freedom from type Ia endoleak was 97.0% ± 2.1% in the ANCHOR cohort and 94.1% ± 2.5% in the control cohort through 2 years (P = .34). The 2-year freedom from neck dilation in the ANCHOR and control cohorts was 90.4% ± 5.6% and 87.3% ± 4.3%, respectively (P = .46); 2-year freedom from sac enlargement was 97.0% ± 2.1% and 94.0% ± 3.0%, respectively (P = .67). No device migration was observed. Aneurysm sac regression was observed in 81.1% ± 9.5% of ANCHOR subjects through 2 years compared with 48.7% ± 5.9% of control subjects (P = .01). Cox regression analysis found an inverse correlation between number of hostile neck criteria met and later sac regression (P = .05). Preoperative neck thrombus circumference and infrarenal diameter were also variables associated with later sac regression, although not to a significant degree (P = .10 and P = .06, respectively). Control subjects with thrombus were significantly less likely to experience later sac regression than those without thrombus (6% and 43%, respectively; P = .001). In ANCHOR subjects, rate of regression was not significantly different in subjects with or without thrombus (33% and 36%, respectively; P = .82). Control subjects with wide aortic necks (>28 mm) were observed to experience sac regression at a lower rate than subjects with smaller diameter necks (10% and 44%, respectively; P = .004). Wide neck and normal neck subjects implanted with EndoAnchors experienced later sac regression at roughly equivalent rates (44% and 33%, respectively; P = .50). CONCLUSIONS:In propensity-matched cohorts of subjects undergoing EVAR, the rate of sac regression in subjects treated with EndoAnchors was significantly higher. EndoAnchors may mitigate the adverse effect of wide infrarenal necks and neck thrombus on sac regression, although further studies are needed to evaluate the long-term effect of EndoAnchors.

With the growing epidemic of diabetes and hyperlipidemia, there is an ever-increasing prevalence of peripheral arterial disease (PAD) of the lower extremities. The complications of PAD can be devastating and can increase the economic burden on the healthcare system. Traditionally, open revascularization procedures have been the mainstay of treatment for lower extremity PAD. Cardiac comorbidities are common among patients with PAD and as such may prohibit open revascularization. With the advent of minimally invasive endovascular procedures, the threshold for revascularization opportunities has increased. Despite promising early results of percutaneous transluminal angioplasty (PTA), atherectomy, and stenting, long-term outcomes are hindered by neointimal hyperplasia, which accounts for high restenosis and thrombosis rates. The utility and efficacy of drug-eluting stents in decreasing restenosis rates has been well demonstrated for coronary artery disease. This article will present a review of the current literature available on the use of drug-eluting (polymer-free) and drug-coated (polymer) stents for lower extremity PAD.

BACKGROUND: Among patients with peripheral arterial disease (PAD), smokers have a higher incidence of life- and limb-threatening complications, including lower extremity ischemic rest pain, myocardial infarction, and cardiac death, highlighting the need for smoking reduction. Several studies have previously investigated the perioperative period as a teachable moment for smoking cessation. The purpose of this study is to determine whether the type of revascularization for PAD (percutaneous versus open) is associated with smoking reduction. METHODS: Study participants included patients seen at a tertiary academic medical center in Providence, RI, between 2005 and 2010 and assigned International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision code diagnoses indicative of PAD. This study uses patient-answered surveys and retrospective chart review to assess changes in smoking habits after medical, percutaneous, or open revascularization. Surveys also assessed patient perceptions regarding the influence of intervention on smoking reduction and how strongly patients associate PAD with their smoking habits. RESULTS: Of 54 patients who were active smokers at the time of intervention, 8 (67%) in the medical management group, 12 (50%) in the percutaneous group, and 15 (83%) in the open intervention group reduced smoking by 50% after intervention. After controlling for several confounders, open revascularization was independently associated with smoking reduction when compared with percutaneous intervention (odds ratio, 8.26; 95% confidence interval, 1.18, 76.7; P = 0.043). Surveys revealed that 94% of the patients believed that smoking was a significant contributor to their PAD. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with PAD who undergo open revascularization are more likely to reduce smoking than those who undergo percutaneous revascularization. The perioperative period provides an opportunity to improve rates of smoking reduction.